The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held in the case of Nikhil Padha, Human Rights Activist V/s Chairman Human Rights Commission that Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is not a pill for every ill and should not be considered if good intentions of the petitioners are in question, the Bench further stated that a PIL should not be used as an arm gun to gather political mileage or scandalise the bar. Hence, a PIL should not be admitted in order to misuse the procedure of law or if the pleadings are vexatious, misinterpreted, baseless and indefensible.
Therefore, the court dismissed a PIL looking for reopening of Jammu and Kashmir Human Rights Commission, Women Commission, Accountability Commission and State Information Commission which were closed due to removal of Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution of India. While keeping aside the plea, the Court stated that the narration of the facts in the writ petition disclosed that the petitioner was not a bonafide person but a proxy person set up by someone to start a litigation in public interest.
The court further added that the petition disclosed that the petitioner is not really concerned with the formation of the above fora but the real aim was to criticize the government over the eradication of the special status given to J&K. The Court dismissed the PIL with costs of Rs. 10,000. It also held that it is looking forward to the government taking actions in the right direction to resuscitate the disused institutions stated in the petition.
We offer a wide range of lawyers to cater to all your every legal needs and requirement.
Our team provides you support in managing your legal issue without any additional and hidden charges.
Once you finalise the lawyer, you can proceed with predefined time estimation & pricing.
Dedicated Case Follow-up Manager to assist you in coordination with the Lawyer.